We all know nobody's ever gone at the first two offers. And it's quite possible nobody ever will - the only people to seriously consider the second offer I can think of are Dot, and perhaps Aaron and Swappy Matt for very different reasons. And while we did have a spell of regular third-offer deals at one time, you have to look well back into Season 2 to find the last one.

So how about cutting out one phone call per show? We could either have an eight-box opening round, with perhaps the chance of the Banker occasionally calling midway through to offer a swap or some other twist. Or they could start with 6 boxes, followed by 5 boxes then switch to the regular three after that, cutting out one early offer. It would allow them to give more screen time to the other contestants in the early stages as well.

Definately not. The show would go too quickly, and then we'd start getting a lot of early deals.

Hmmm I'm not sure about messing with the format. i like the occasional extra 6th round offers - works well but they shouldn't change anything else.

I think if anything, they should keep it as it is, but make the offer after every box after 5-box a more permanent thing. I didn't like that at first when it was first done (in Ned's game?) but I have really grown to like it over the past week as it adds so much tension to the game and gives the players more of a tough decision.

So actually, I'd like to see an increase in the number of offers in a game!

I think the early offers are important because the banker can muck about and make joke offers. If we didn't have the early offers, we'd lose the element of the banker playing about which is often a part of the show now. He might start making joke offers in the later stages of the game as a regular thing if there were fewer opening offers.

I'm with h2005 here. Six offers is probably too few to start with. Remember, the original format (as used in most other countries) has no fewer than nine!

A possible idea - go to three rounds of two after eight-box rather than two rounds of three. I think that works more 'smoothly' than 3-1-1-1. And yes, Ned's was the first 3-1-1-1.

Speeding through the earlier rounds might work though. Might.

I remember thinking 5-5-3-3-2-2 might work better than 5-3-3-3-3-3 ages ago; I still think that might be valid.

Yeah, I'd prefer to see 5-5-3-3-2-2 if there was a permanent change, having an offer after every box loses the tension and also seems like a bit of a kop out if someone deals.

I think the single box offers work well on occasions - but if done permanently would probably make the £250,000 absolutely unwinnable unless basicasic was in the chair.

To get to an in-play final pair with it you need to take a gamble at five-box and win, but with this format you've got to turn down three offers and unless the offers were complete jokes the vast majority of players wouldn't push their luck past four-box or three-box if they avoided hitting it.

yes that's a good point. The point of the format is that it's diffcult to gamble at the end but when someone pulls it off a la Graeme/Bunney it's exciting. There's arguments both ways on that. Only really Annie/Maria have taken advantage of the extra box offers. e.g. dealing at 3 box.

We haven't seen it with the £250k in play yet though, have we?

.l

I do think the early offers are relevant - there have been certain first and second offers that were so good, and then the players had a crap middle that they ended up chasing the money - for instance, I doubt Howard would have cahsed the game as much as he did had he never been offered 18k at the start, and similarly for Matt's 35k - I reckon he'd have taken the 25k at 2-box had he not been offered 35k early in the gane.

It can work the other way though - Paul H got inflated early offfers, then having had a great 3rd round, the banker had no choice to offer him a ridiculous amount for that stage of the game, which almost nobody would no-deal - the board wasn't even perfect either!

I dread to think what Matt would have got offered had he avoided the power 5 in the 3rd round (something nudging 50k I reckon!)

I think the setup should stay as it is generally. The offer after every box after 5 box does add excitement no question but I fear it would become stale if used too often. But every now and then would be fine.

The first 2 offers are realistically irrelevant as far as the contestant is concerned but do tell the viewers what sort of mood the banker is in and establishes the tone of the game as far as player/banker relationship goes. So they should stay.

I'd like to see a gunge tank especially for dealers who went too soon.

I like the format as it is. I don't like the Haloween week format. I think it's more exciting when someone no deals at 5 box and has to pick another 3 before getting another offer. There's no point taking away the early offers. One of these days, someone's going to deal at the first or second offer, I'm sure of it.

Basic need not have any offers in his game

The format is good as it is..although the occasional change/perhaps introduction of a slightly new format at the end would be ok for me.

If the Banker had read his posts on here, he'd get SWAP, SWAP, SWAP, SWAP, SWAP and SWAP... Would that be an OPW whatever was in his box?

Yes, SWAP offers have no cash so...

Offer 1: SWAP - No Deal (£0.00)
Offer 2: SWAP - No Deal (£0.00)
Offer 3: SWAP - No Deal (£0.00)
Offer 4: SWAP - No Deal (£0.00)
Offer 5: SWAP - No Deal (£0.00)
Offer 6: SWAP - No Deal (£0.00)
In Box: 1p
basicasic ed the Banker!

He could swap for six different boxes then swap them all away again! Craig could have at least done it 3 times.

I'd like to see someone actually swap their box more than once in a game! It would be the ultimate in indecisive gameplay...

Not many opportunities for it to happen though, I think PJ is the only one to be offered a swap after already having swapped.

If he swapped away £250k for 1p then it would certainly be a disaster!